Saguaro
-
Posts
234 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by Saguaro
-
-
Please share your feelings and/or knowledge. Does anyone think the authorities given to LDS women will ever change? I know that young women can go on missions but are limited in things they can do like Baptize and other various things that say a Melchizedek priest can do. While on thier mission what else may they do besides teach. Will it always be that women can not hold any position higher than those in the Relief Society?
Thanks.
Anything is possible, I think women may receive the priesthood some day, what's continuing revelation for if not to bring about change? Today women perform priesthood ordnances in the temples (washing & anointing) and some women were ordained in the early days of the restored church.
-
I think it's totally wrong to wear dark tights and a mini-skirt. Isn't part of the point of garments to keep revealing certain parts of a person's body to a minimum or not at all? I know a person that was inactive for a long time and now she's endowed. I told her this and she felt I was wrong - she did/does wear black tights and shorter skirts. She just accused me of judging her and said it was God who needed to judge her not me.
I only gave her my opinion, but she often took things in ways I didn't intend them. I met her thru a dating site. I've ended communications with her for a few reasons.Of course she felt like you were judging here, you just told her that what she was doing was wrong. I'm amazed that we worry so much about other people's underwear. We are so quick to judge people on how they are wearing their garments or if they are wearing them at all. How other people wear or don't wear their garments is of absolutely no concern to anyone but themselves. If you feel someone is not wearing it appropriately it's not your place to correct them, you should only worry about yourself.
-
Are cola drinks against the Word of Wisdom?
No. I'm going to get back to my Diet Coke now.
-
My bishop recently helped a homeless mom and her son who are not members that had been hanging out in our area. He bought them food from the storehouse and some decent clothes from DI so they could looks respectable enough to look for a job.
-
From the CHI, page 78
This is probably the first place your Bishop is going to look for an answer. Looks like as long as you're temple worthy you don't have anything to worry about. I wouldn't trust a 1976 Ensign article regarding matters of policy, a lot can change in 34 years.If a member has been divorced or legally separated or has had a marriage annulled since last receiving a temple recommend, the Bishop and Stake President may feel impressed to carefully interview the member prior to the expiration of the recommend to ensure continued temple worthiness. Events leading to the breakdown of the marriage may be reviewed. If the member has not committed a serious transgression, a temple recommend may be retained or renewed according to the usual procedure.
-
One problem with the prohibition on R rated movies is that the rating system is very inconsistent. Many PG-13 movies now have things that you would expect to see in R rated movies. On the other hand, I recently watched the original Clash of the Titans from 1981, it was rated PG yet it had several scenes of nudity that I wouldn't expect to see now in a PG movie. Many rated R movies are well written and acted and are worth seeing. I think the point here is to follow the spirit of the law and only watch movies that you feel are appropriate.
The key sometimes is to educate yourself about the content of a movie before you see it. I know a couple who love comedies, and they would often go to the theater to see the latest comedy and end of being disappointed or walking out because of the crude content, but they didn't bother to do their homework before going. Funny thing is they've done this several times, I guess some people never learn.
-
This topic was also discussed in this thread:
http://www.lds.net/forums/general-discussion/32155-8-mormon-proposition.html
-
Do I take your word for it? Remember Suzie, it is a two-way street when you demand proof. State the reference material.
Since you insist, this is the best I could find for now.
From: The Wives of Joseph Smith - Emma HaleHe kept the practice veiled from the public and from his wife, Emma. When she discovered that he was taking additional wives, she struggled to accept it.
The sources cited on this web site can be found here:
I recently purchased and plan on reading one of those sources, Mormon Enigma: Emma Hale Smith, by Newel & Avery.
-
I have yet to find any evidence that Joseph Smith practice plural marriage without acknowledging this to Emma. He even carried that hand written revelation for ten-years until he was confronted by a ministering spirit and was told to enact what was given.
However, if you can provide any reference that indicates your statement, please post it.
Thanks
I guess the whole point of my post was lost on you. Let me repeat, I don't want to start a debate about JS or polygamy, that's not what this thread is about.
-
This debate about what history we should or should not learn in church is a touchy one for me. A good friend of mine, a life long member of the church, did not find out until she was 36 years old that Joseph Smith practice polygamy. She had only heard about Emma and what a great loving couple they were, then she found out Joseph practiced polygamy behind her back and lied to her and married women who were already married. It nearly destroyed her testimony.
I don't want to start a debate about JS or polygamy, but my point is in 36 years of living in the church, going to primary, seminary, institute, sacrament meeting, sunday school, young women, she never once heard this taught from an official source. Members of the church need to be prepared for this kind of thing, whether it's polygamy, MMM, seer stones, whatever, because eventually it's going to come up, whether it's on a mission or whenever, and it can be devastating to hear about it the first time. People often feel lied to an betrayed by the church. I don't buy the argument that the information is out there, and we should all study the church and its history on our own, so there's no need to teach in in Church. How many times have we sat through another boring sunday school or PH/RS lesson on the same topic we've heard 100 times with the same answers to the same qustions. How refershing would it be to have a real history lesson just once a year where we address things like this that the rest of world seems to know about us but the average member is woefully under educated about.
(Example, I gave a lesson in EQ once about Joseph Smith and brought up using seer stones and a hat to translate the book of Mormon, and used a quote from an Ensign article as backup, and I asked how many people had heard of that before, many hands went up, and I'll never forget the look on one guy's face, he looked like I had just told him the BofM was translated by aliens.)
I think the situation is actually improving, as information is more available through the internet and people participate on discussions like this they are exposed to more information at an early age. We speak very openly with our children about polygamy and other issues. I don't want them to be blindsided by these issues later in life.
-
There's one little girl in our ward who has Celiac disease, similar to others that have posted, the family brings a little piece of bread just for her, it is placed on a tray and blessed, and one particular deacon has the responsibility to take that special bread to her during the sacrament. It's done very discreetly, I didn't know it was being done until a few weeks ago.
-
My apologies, I didn't see your question at the end.Did you see the word 'RIGHT' after the last sentence? It was asking to see if the postulation was correct or not.
Now, did Joseph baptize any black members after the translating the Book of Abraham? Where did President Young learned this? Was it from the Lord or Joseph Smith?
Regarding whether or not it was from the Lord or Joseph Smith, I don't think we'll ever know unless BY is on record having said so. Personally, in my opinion (which isn't worth much), I don't think it came from either. David O McKay prayed about lifting the ban but felt the time wasn't right, he called the ban a "policy", not doctrine, but still felt it required a revelation to discontinue it because it had been in place for so long (see "David O McKay and the Rise of Modern Mormonism" by Greg Prince).
I did find this, it's very interesting.
Mormonism's Negro Doctrine: An Historical Overview
(Apoloiges for threadjacking, this has nothing to do with the original post.)
-
What's your source that states it stopped with Joseph Smith? Oh right, you said you don't have one! It's generally accepted that the ban was initiated by Brigham Young, his views on the subject as well documented.Not to sidetrack to far, regarding Blacks receiving Priesthood ordinations, I thought, it stopped when Joseph learned this for himself and not President Young. Even thought, it was not recorded officially, he simply stopped this practice [including temple ordinations]. I believe, there were still members within the church, well into the 1860s, baptizing and giving the priesthood to the blacks until President Young finally stopped it. Right?
... any man having one drop of the seed of [Cain] ... in him cannot hold the priesthood and if no other Prophet ever spake it before I will say it now in the name of Jesus Christ I know it is true and others know it ...
Brigham Young, 1852
-
Yes I completely understand Pam but it is far worst for members who murder vice those who are non-members. For members, there is no 'forgiveness'. For non-members, through the efforts of the victim forgiving the parents and long duration of repentance, they will at least retain the telestial kingdom.
What do you mean there is no forgiveness for members? I agree the guy is scum but member or not the atonement applies to all who repent.
-
Why don't we recite prayers?
We do every Sunday in sacrament meeting with the sacrament prayers.
-
Sorry to intrude. John Dehlin here.
Some quick answers:
1) I am active in the church. My wife and I teach primary together.
2) I do currently hold a temple recommend
3) I consider myself to be a believer in God, and in Jesus. I also view the church and the Book of Mormon as inspired -- although I struggle sometimes with how literal vs. symbolic/metaphorical these beliefs are.
In the end....I choose to follow/believe....I continually have doubts/concerns...but I plan to remain an active, committed member until the day I die.
I can't say that I know anything (church related), but I hope for most of the typical gospel related things (purpose in life, life after death, that the "truth" can be found, that I'll be with my family in heaven) -- and I consider my active membership in the church to be an act of faith in and of itself...accompanied by many, many doubts.
All in all, I love the church, I love its members, and I love being Mormon.
Welcome John!
-
Here's a pretty good review of the movie.
-
sorry. no I haven't. And I didn't deliberately add the link. It just sort of popped up
Weird, is that some kind of automated thing here at lds.net?
-
Ummm, isn't that the same article I posted? Ever heard the term "smeek"?
-
This was on the front page of my newspaper this morning.
Arizona immigration law fallout harms LDS Church outreach
I'm not a fan of Russell Pearce, but it's too bad that one person can be perceived to represent the entire church.
-
MOE-- Oh, I was just going by what most MP's teach-- that you "won't meet your eternal companion while on your mission", and wondering why they say that, if we are not predestined.
I've never heard this in my life, from a mission president or anyone else. No one can foretell when you will or will not to meet your future spouse. I'm sure mission presidents don't want it to happen because it will seriously distract the missionary, but it does and will happen as long as young males and females are put in situations where they meet many people.
I agree with the advice others have given, your friend needs to talk to the MP and get transferred immediately, then pursue the relationship after the mission. Also, the SWK quote that MOE posted was right on, it's the first thing I thought of while reading the first post.
-
I should point out, too, that not every bishop is as tuned in to the CHI as he should be. For example, my wife and I counseled with our bishop before I got a vasectomy. He said "no problem". A few months later, a friend of mine in our stake presidency asked me about my experiences because he was considering getting one too. I told him what our bishop had said. He came back to me a week or so later and quoted the relevant section in the CHI. Oops.
(Of course, my wife and I fasted and prayed, and I believe that our decision was the correct one despite the fact that the bishop's advice was not in alignment with the CHI. So there!)
The CHI discourages sterilization, but does not prohibit it. It does suggest you consult with the Bishop. I find it interesting though that vesectomy seems to be a big deal, but tubal ligation seems very common. How many women out there conferred with their bishop before getting their tubes tied? I don't think it's up to the bishop to decide when a couple has had enough kids.
Since the average curch member has no idea what's in the CHI they shouldn't be held accountable to things like this. Like you said, the important thing is that you prayed about it and felt it was the right decision for you.
-
I am a fan of JD and his podcasts. He does have his critics though, ironically his loudest critics are those who have left the church and don't understand why he stays in.
Through his podcasts and other ventures he has helped literally thousands of people who have faced a crisis of faith. He has given people outlets and resources that they would not have had otherwise. He is very genuine and sincere and has dedicated his life to helping people navigate their trials. I have corresponded with him and spoken to him on the phone brieftly, I hope to meet him one day and personally thank him for helping a very dear friend of mine.
-
Just wanted to correct this little piece of misinformation. The scriptures tell us that "the Spirit of the Lord doth not dwell in unholy temples." One must remain worthy to have the Spirit dwell with them and receive all the benefits of that gift. More info can be read on this at one of my favorite gospel references.
I see where you're going with this. I do agree that there is a distinction with the gift of the Holy Ghost, when you have the gift of the Holy Ghost you can have the constant companionship of the Spirit, but the Spirit does not simply abandon those who may be unworthy or may be struggling. Isn't that when you need the Spirit the most? The Spirit may not be with you constantly but I think that no matter what the situation is if you call on the spirit it will be there to comfort you and teach you. If this were not so, then how would you explain the people through time and from all religions who have been influenced by the Holy Ghost? Do you think Martin Luther wasn't moved by the Spirit to post his 95 Theses? Do you think that the great artists and musicians of the world aren't inspired by the Spirit to produce their great works? Do you think that all those who are earnestly seeking God and trying to live good lives, even if they're not LDS, can feel the Spirit? I think too often we as LDS think we have a monopoly on the Spirit and only those who are 'worthy' by our definition can feel it.
“The great religious leaders of the world such as Mohammed, Confucius, and the Reformers, as well as philosophers including Socrates, Plato, and others, received a portion of God’s light. Moral truths were given to them by God to enlighten whole nations and to bring a higher level of understanding to individuals. … We believe that God has given and will give to all peoples sufficient knowledge to help them on their way to eternal salvation” (“Statement of the First Presidency regarding God’s Love for All Mankind,” 15 Feb. 1978).
Tithing
in Learn about The Church of Jesus Christ Of Latter-day Saints
Posted